US20230155896A1 - Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets - Google Patents
Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20230155896A1 US20230155896A1 US18/152,443 US202318152443A US2023155896A1 US 20230155896 A1 US20230155896 A1 US 20230155896A1 US 202318152443 A US202318152443 A US 202318152443A US 2023155896 A1 US2023155896 A1 US 2023155896A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- network
- assets
- node
- criticality
- robustness
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000011144 upstream manufacturing Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 33
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 22
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 claims description 12
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 8
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 8
- 238000004590 computer program Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000006872 improvement Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000007689 inspection Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000012937 correction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002250 progressing effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L41/00—Arrangements for maintenance, administration or management of data switching networks, e.g. of packet switching networks
- H04L41/14—Network analysis or design
- H04L41/145—Network analysis or design involving simulating, designing, planning or modelling of a network
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L41/00—Arrangements for maintenance, administration or management of data switching networks, e.g. of packet switching networks
- H04L41/12—Discovery or management of network topologies
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L45/00—Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks
- H04L45/22—Alternate routing
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L43/00—Arrangements for monitoring or testing data switching networks
- H04L43/08—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters
- H04L43/0805—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters by checking availability
- H04L43/0811—Monitoring or testing based on specific metrics, e.g. QoS, energy consumption or environmental parameters by checking availability by checking connectivity
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L45/00—Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks
- H04L45/12—Shortest path evaluation
- H04L45/128—Shortest path evaluation for finding disjoint paths
- H04L45/1283—Shortest path evaluation for finding disjoint paths with disjoint links
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y04—INFORMATION OR COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES HAVING AN IMPACT ON OTHER TECHNOLOGY AREAS
- Y04S—SYSTEMS INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGIES RELATED TO POWER NETWORK OPERATION, COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING THE ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION, TRANSMISSION, DISTRIBUTION, MANAGEMENT OR USAGE, i.e. SMART GRIDS
- Y04S40/00—Systems for electrical power generation, transmission, distribution or end-user application management characterised by the use of communication or information technologies, or communication or information technology specific aspects supporting them
Definitions
- the present invention relates to network management, and more specifically, to network management based on assessment of the topological robustness and criticality of assets.
- networks that include a number of assets that affect each other.
- exemplary networks with a number of interdependent assets include a power network (power grid), gas network, and a water network. Reliability of such networks can depend not only on the assets themselves and their failure rates but also on the robustness of the network topology.
- Assets of a given network can be of different types and can be for different uses.
- a power network includes electrical assets (e.g., transformers, switches, fuses) and non-electrical assets (e.g., support structures, poles).
- a method of managing a network that includes assets includes modeling, using a processor, the network as a directed graph with each of the assets represented as a node; determining, using the processor, alternative paths to each node from each available corresponding source of the node; computing upstream robustness of each node; computing upstream robustness of the network: computing downstream criticality of each node; and managing the network and each asset of the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- a network management system to manage assets of the network includes a memory device configured to store instructions, and a processor configured to process the instructions to compute upstream robustness of each node, compute upstream robustness of the network, compute downstream criticality of each node, and to manage the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- a computer program product includes a tangible storage medium readable by a processing circuit and storing instructions for execution by the processing circuit to perform a method of managing a network that includes assets.
- the method includes modeling the network as a directed graph with each of the assets represented as a node; determining alternative paths to each node from each available corresponding source of the node; computing upstream robustness of each node; computing upstream robustness of the network; computing downstream criticality of each node; and managing the network and each asset of the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- FIG. 1 is a process flow of a method of managing a network based on determining upstream robustness and downstream criticality according to embodiments;
- FIG. 2 is an exemplary graph used to identify nodes and connections for embodiments of the invention.
- FIG. 3 shows the processes involved in computing upstream robustness at block 130 ( FIG. 1 ) according to an embodiment
- FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a processing system to implement embodiments of the invention.
- topological robustness can affect network reliability in addition to failure rate of assets within the network.
- Topological robustness of the network refers to whether multiple sources are available to a given asset such that, if one fails, the other(s) can continue to supply the asset, for example.
- a lack of robustness increases criticality of an asset. That is, for example, the only asset supplying several downstream assets is more critical than one of several assets supplying a downstream asset. The interplay between robustness and criticality, therefore, effects the management of the network. A less robust and more critical asset may require more frequent inspection, for example.
- Embodiments of the methods and systems described herein relate to determining upstream robustness as well as downstream criticality in order to manage the network and its assets. While an electrical network (grid) is discussed for exemplary purposes, the description herein applies to any network with interdependent assets.
- FIG. 1 is a process flow of a method of managing a network based on determining upstream robustness and downstream criticality according to embodiments detailed below.
- asset and node are used interchangeably because the representation of the assets in a directed graph is as nodes.
- modeling the network as a directed graph includes indicating the assets of the network as nodes and showing the interconnection among the nodes as edges or paths which are further detailed below. Determining alternative paths to each target node from available sources, at block 120 , leads to computing the upstream robustness of each target node at block 130 .
- upstream robustness of the network is computed.
- an additional set of key performance indicators (KPIs) used for robustness assessment are also computed.
- KPIs key performance indicators
- computing downstream criticality for each target node is performed along with computing an additional set of KPIs for assessment of asset criticality.
- Managing the network at block 160 involves examining the robustness and criticality determined at the previous processes. Each of these processes is further detailed below.
- FIG. 2 is an exemplary graph 200 used to identify nodes 210 and connections 220 for embodiments of the invention.
- Several nodes 210 are shown with connections 220 indicating the physical topology of the network. Steps involved in the generation of the graph 200 are known and are not detailed here.
- the physical topology is converted into a list of edges. Each edge is an ordered pair of two assets, and it is assumed that electric power flows between the pair of assets.
- the assets are represented by the nodes 210 and the connectivity 220 is defined by the edges.
- the nodes 210 may be classified in one of three categories: source assets that serve as the source of all electrical power in the grid, auxiliary assets (e.g., cables, poles, switches, protection devices) that are critical to delivery of electrical power to sink assets, and the sink assets that directly serve customers.
- the nodes 210 include a source asset—source pp—a sink asset—endpoint s2—and auxiliary assets—cables c1-c6, transformers t1-t3, and open point o1. While the exemplary graph 200 pertains to a power network (grid), the embodiments detailed herein are not limited to a power network, as noted above.
- Determining the set of alternate paths (at block 120 ) Pt from the source nodes to each of the target nodes t includes using a breadth-first search (BFS).
- the BFS involves traversing the graph (e.g., 200 in FIG. 2 ) by beginning with the source node (e.g., pp in FIG. 2 ) and progressing through the nodes ( 210 , FIG. 2 ) one-at-a-time from the root to its neighbors.
- the set Pt is given by:
- the number of paths to the target node t is m.
- Pt which represents a length of l(1 number of assets) from the source asset to the target node t
- Each element in the Pt set represents a path Pt,i, and each path Pt,i includes a set of intervening assets.
- FIG. 3 shows the processes involved in computing upstream robustness at block 130 ( FIG. 1 ) according to an embodiment.
- the processes include computing inter-path independency of each alternative path Pt,i in Pt 305 , computing intra-path independency of the target node t in each alternative path Pt,i in Pt 345 , and computing the upstream robustness for each target node t based on the inter-path independency and the intra-path independency 370 .
- Each of these processes if further detailed herein.
- computing the universe Ut of assets between the target node t and the sources is as follow:
- Ut is the union of the paths in the set Pt. Determining the frequency of occurrences fc of each asset t in Ut, at block 320 , is given by:
- f c ⁇ f c + 1 , ifc ⁇ P t , i f c , ifc ⁇ P t , i ⁇ [ EQ . 4 ]
- computing the inter-path independency of a path Pt,i is based on summing the score of each component in the path and normalizing with the length of the path Lt,i:
- PI t , i int ⁇ er 1 L t , i ⁇ ⁇ i ⁇ P t , i S i [ EQ . 6 ]
- determining the length of the path Pt,i in terms of the number of components in the path is based on the cardinality (number of elements) of the path (set) Pt,i and is given by:
- computing the intra-path independency of a target node t in a path P t,i is as a function of the length of the path determined from EQ. 7.
- the “+1” in the denominator is included to include the target node t, because the target node t may fail, as well.
- the number of alternative paths to the target node t is m.
- the upstream robustness is a function of the level of disjointedness between all alternative paths to the target node t (represented by the inter-path independency) and the number of components on which the target node t depends to reach a source in each of these paths (represented by intra-path independency). That is, the more disjointed the alternative paths are (such that a failure in one is less likely to affect another) and the fewer components between the target node t and each source of each path (such that there are fewer chances of the path to the source being disrupted), the more robust the target node t is.
- computing upstream robustness of the network G is based on the upstream vulnerability of individual assets of the network G.
- N assets N target nodes in turn
- the network upstream robustness is given by:
- the network upstream robustness measures the aptitude of the network to continue operation (e.g., deliver electric power to nodes of the network in the exemplary case of an electrical grid application). Thus, only the robustness of each asset is considered in computing the network robustness. Additional KPIs are also computed at block 140 .
- the path count (PCt) of a target node t assesses the topological redundancy in reaching the target node t from available sources.
- the path count evaluates the total number of alternative paths to the target node t from the source(s) and is computed as the cardinality of Pt (determined in EQ. 1) as:
- the effective disjoint path count (EDPCt) of a target node t quantifies the effective number of independent paths from a source to the target node t.
- the EDPCt accounts for the disjointedness of each path P t,i (from EQ. 2) in the set of paths P t and is computed as a summation of the inter-path independency of each path from a source to the target node t:
- the effective path length (EPLt) of a target node t gives the average effective distance to sources of the target node t in terms of the number of intervening assets.
- the EPLt is computed as a number of assets per effective disjoint path between the target node t and its sources:
- downstream criticality is computed for each target node t. Because, with respect to activity downstream of a given asset, the asset is not a target (as it is for an upstream source), the term component c is used rather than target node t. To determine the downstream criticality of a component c of a network G, the component c is removed from the network to obtain a reduced network G′:
- the network upstream robustness is computed for G′, the reduced network, based on the processing detailed above at blocks 110 through 140 . Then, the downstream criticality of the component c is computed as a drop in the network upstream robustness of the network G (see EQ. 10):
- the use of the robustness of the component c in both the numerator and denominator acts as a correction factor to ensure that the downstream criticality of a leaf node is 0.
- a leaf node is one with no children such that it has no effect on assets downstream of itself.
- Additional KPIs are also computed at block 150 .
- the disconnection impact index (DIIt) of an asset t quantifies the impact of its removal from the network from different perspectives. Consequences of the removal of an asset t can be measured based on different aspects (consequences of the removal) including, for example, the number of disconnected assets, the number of disconnected customers (from the network), the amount of lost demand, and the amount of lost revenue. Consequences represent the set of these and other consequences, and
- EQ. 16 indicates the set of assets that are disconnected upon removal of the asset t. Then DIIt is given by:
- DII t ⁇ t ⁇ s t consequences t [ EQ . 17 ]
- Determining the upstream robustness and downstream criticality of the assets of the network, as well as the network as a whole facilitates managing the network at block 160 .
- the relative criticality of a given asset may suggest a more or less frequent inspection and maintenance period, for example. More critical assets may be inspected and maintained more often than less critical assets. As another example, the source of a less robust asset may be maintained more often than the source of a more robust asset.
- the information may be used to upgrade the system, as well. For example, a redundant source may be added for highly critical assets.
- FIG. 4 is a processing system 400 configured to implement embodiments described herein.
- the processes detailed herein may be implemented by one or more processors (processing circuits) 410 based on instructions stored in one or more memory devices 420 .
- the memory devices 420 may additionally store data used in the processing.
- the instructions and one or more memory devices 420 represent a computer program product to implement the detailed processes.
- the processing system 400 may additionally include an input interface 430 (e.g., keyboard, wired or wireless communication link) to receive commands or data, as well as an output interface 440 (e.g., display device, communication link) to send output.
- the computer program product ( 420 ) and processor 410 may be stand-alone components or may be integrated with other components of the network.
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Computer Networks & Wireless Communication (AREA)
- Signal Processing (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
- Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
- Data Exchanges In Wide-Area Networks (AREA)
- Information Retrieval, Db Structures And Fs Structures Therefor (AREA)
Abstract
Description
- The present application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 17/020,794, filed Sep. 14, 2020 and entitled “Network Management Based on Assessment of Topological Robustness and Criticality of Assets,” now U.S. Pat. No. 11,552,854, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/000,818, filed Jun. 5, 2018 and entitled “Network Management Based on Assessment of Topological Robustness and Criticality of Assets,” now U.S. Pat. No. 10,778,529, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/745,775, filed Jun. 22, 2015 and entitled “Network Management Based on Assessment of Topological Robustness and Criticality of Assets,” now U.S. Pat. No. 9,992,069, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/665,398 filed Mar. 23, 2015 and entitled “Network Management Based on Assessment of Topological Robustness and Criticality of Assets,” now U.S. Pat. No. 9,923,778, which are hereby incorporated by reference herein.
- The present invention relates to network management, and more specifically, to network management based on assessment of the topological robustness and criticality of assets.
- There are many types of networks that include a number of assets that affect each other. Exemplary networks with a number of interdependent assets include a power network (power grid), gas network, and a water network. Reliability of such networks can depend not only on the assets themselves and their failure rates but also on the robustness of the network topology. Assets of a given network can be of different types and can be for different uses. For example, a power network includes electrical assets (e.g., transformers, switches, fuses) and non-electrical assets (e.g., support structures, poles).
- According to one embodiment of the present invention, a method of managing a network that includes assets includes modeling, using a processor, the network as a directed graph with each of the assets represented as a node; determining, using the processor, alternative paths to each node from each available corresponding source of the node; computing upstream robustness of each node; computing upstream robustness of the network: computing downstream criticality of each node; and managing the network and each asset of the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- According to another embodiment, a network management system to manage assets of the network includes a memory device configured to store instructions, and a processor configured to process the instructions to compute upstream robustness of each node, compute upstream robustness of the network, compute downstream criticality of each node, and to manage the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- According to yet another embodiment, a computer program product includes a tangible storage medium readable by a processing circuit and storing instructions for execution by the processing circuit to perform a method of managing a network that includes assets. The method includes modeling the network as a directed graph with each of the assets represented as a node; determining alternative paths to each node from each available corresponding source of the node; computing upstream robustness of each node; computing upstream robustness of the network; computing downstream criticality of each node; and managing the network and each asset of the network based on the upstream robustness and the downstream criticality of each node.
- Additional features and advantages are realized through the techniques of the present invention. Other embodiments and aspects of the invention are described in detail herein and are considered a part of the claimed invention. For a better understanding of the invention with the advantages and the features, refer to the description and to the drawings.
- The subject matter which is regarded as the invention is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the claims at the conclusion of the specification. The forgoing and other features, and advantages of the invention are apparent from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
-
FIG. 1 is a process flow of a method of managing a network based on determining upstream robustness and downstream criticality according to embodiments; -
FIG. 2 is an exemplary graph used to identify nodes and connections for embodiments of the invention; -
FIG. 3 shows the processes involved in computing upstream robustness at block 130 (FIG. 1 ) according to an embodiment; and -
FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a processing system to implement embodiments of the invention. - As noted above, topological robustness can affect network reliability in addition to failure rate of assets within the network. Topological robustness of the network refers to whether multiple sources are available to a given asset such that, if one fails, the other(s) can continue to supply the asset, for example. A lack of robustness increases criticality of an asset. That is, for example, the only asset supplying several downstream assets is more critical than one of several assets supplying a downstream asset. The interplay between robustness and criticality, therefore, effects the management of the network. A less robust and more critical asset may require more frequent inspection, for example. Embodiments of the methods and systems described herein relate to determining upstream robustness as well as downstream criticality in order to manage the network and its assets. While an electrical network (grid) is discussed for exemplary purposes, the description herein applies to any network with interdependent assets.
-
FIG. 1 is a process flow of a method of managing a network based on determining upstream robustness and downstream criticality according to embodiments detailed below. Throughout the discussion herein, asset and node are used interchangeably because the representation of the assets in a directed graph is as nodes. Atblock 110, modeling the network as a directed graph includes indicating the assets of the network as nodes and showing the interconnection among the nodes as edges or paths which are further detailed below. Determining alternative paths to each target node from available sources, atblock 120, leads to computing the upstream robustness of each target node atblock 130. Atblock 140, upstream robustness of the network is computed. Atblock 140, an additional set of key performance indicators (KPIs) used for robustness assessment are also computed. Atblock 150, computing downstream criticality for each target node is performed along with computing an additional set of KPIs for assessment of asset criticality. Managing the network atblock 160 involves examining the robustness and criticality determined at the previous processes. Each of these processes is further detailed below. -
FIG. 2 is anexemplary graph 200 used to identifynodes 210 andconnections 220 for embodiments of the invention.Several nodes 210 are shown withconnections 220 indicating the physical topology of the network. Steps involved in the generation of thegraph 200 are known and are not detailed here. Generally, the physical topology is converted into a list of edges. Each edge is an ordered pair of two assets, and it is assumed that electric power flows between the pair of assets. The assets are represented by thenodes 210 and theconnectivity 220 is defined by the edges. Thenodes 210 may be classified in one of three categories: source assets that serve as the source of all electrical power in the grid, auxiliary assets (e.g., cables, poles, switches, protection devices) that are critical to delivery of electrical power to sink assets, and the sink assets that directly serve customers. In theexemplary graph 200, thenodes 210 include a source asset—source pp—a sink asset—endpoint s2—and auxiliary assets—cables c1-c6, transformers t1-t3, and open point o1. While theexemplary graph 200 pertains to a power network (grid), the embodiments detailed herein are not limited to a power network, as noted above. - Determining the set of alternate paths (at block 120) Pt from the source nodes to each of the target nodes t includes using a breadth-first search (BFS). The BFS involves traversing the graph (e.g., 200 in
FIG. 2 ) by beginning with the source node (e.g., pp inFIG. 2 ) and progressing through the nodes (210,FIG. 2 ) one-at-a-time from the root to its neighbors. The set Pt is given by: -
P t ={P t,1 ,P t,2 , . . . ,P t,m} [EQ. 1] - The number of paths to the target node t is m. For the ith path in the set Pt, which represents a length of l(1 number of assets) from the source asset to the target node t,
-
P t,i ={a 1 ,a 2 , . . . a l} [EQ. 2] - Each element in the Pt set represents a path Pt,i, and each path Pt,i includes a set of intervening assets.
-
FIG. 3 shows the processes involved in computing upstream robustness at block 130 (FIG. 1 ) according to an embodiment. Generally, the processes include computing inter-path independency of each alternative path Pt,i inPt 305, computing intra-path independency of the target node t in each alternative path Pt,i inPt 345, and computing the upstream robustness for each target node t based on the inter-path independency and theintra-path independency 370. Each of these processes if further detailed herein. Atblock 310, computing the universe Ut of assets between the target node t and the sources is as follow: -
U t ={P t,1 ∪P t,2 ∪ . . . ∪P t,m} [EQ. 3] - Ut is the union of the paths in the set Pt. Determining the frequency of occurrences fc of each asset t in Ut, at
block 320, is given by: -
- Computing the score sc of each component t in Ut is based on the score being an inverse of the frequency:
-
- Then, at block 340, computing the inter-path independency of a path Pt,i is based on summing the score of each component in the path and normalizing with the length of the path Lt,i:
-
- At
block 350, determining the length of the path Pt,i in terms of the number of components in the path is based on the cardinality (number of elements) of the path (set) Pt,i and is given by: -
L t,i =|P t,i| [EQ. 7] - Then, at
block 360, computing the intra-path independency of a target node t in a path Pt,i is as a function of the length of the path determined from EQ. 7. -
- The “+1” in the denominator is included to include the target node t, because the target node t may fail, as well. Once the inter-path independency (at block 340, based on blocks 310-340) and the intra-path independency (at
block 360, based onblocks 350 and 360) are computed, upstream robustness of the target node t is computed, atblock 370, as: -
- The number of alternative paths to the target node t is m. As EQ. 9 indicates, the upstream robustness is a function of the level of disjointedness between all alternative paths to the target node t (represented by the inter-path independency) and the number of components on which the target node t depends to reach a source in each of these paths (represented by intra-path independency). That is, the more disjointed the alternative paths are (such that a failure in one is less likely to affect another) and the fewer components between the target node t and each source of each path (such that there are fewer chances of the path to the source being disrupted), the more robust the target node t is.
- At block 140 (
FIG. 1 ), computing upstream robustness of the network G is based on the upstream vulnerability of individual assets of the network G. For the network G with N assets (N target nodes in turn), the network upstream robustness is given by: -
- The network upstream robustness measures the aptitude of the network to continue operation (e.g., deliver electric power to nodes of the network in the exemplary case of an electrical grid application). Thus, only the robustness of each asset is considered in computing the network robustness. Additional KPIs are also computed at
block 140. The path count (PCt) of a target node t assesses the topological redundancy in reaching the target node t from available sources. The path count evaluates the total number of alternative paths to the target node t from the source(s) and is computed as the cardinality of Pt (determined in EQ. 1) as: -
PC t =|P t| [EQ. 11] - The effective disjoint path count (EDPCt) of a target node t quantifies the effective number of independent paths from a source to the target node t. The EDPCt accounts for the disjointedness of each path Pt,i (from EQ. 2) in the set of paths Pt and is computed as a summation of the inter-path independency of each path from a source to the target node t:
-
- The effective path length (EPLt) of a target node t gives the average effective distance to sources of the target node t in terms of the number of intervening assets. The EPLt is computed as a number of assets per effective disjoint path between the target node t and its sources:
-
- At block 150 (
FIG. 1 ), downstream criticality is computed for each target node t. Because, with respect to activity downstream of a given asset, the asset is not a target (as it is for an upstream source), the term component c is used rather than target node t. To determine the downstream criticality of a component c of a network G, the component c is removed from the network to obtain a reduced network G′: -
G′=G\c [EQ. 14] - The network upstream robustness is computed for G′, the reduced network, based on the processing detailed above at
blocks 110 through 140. Then, the downstream criticality of the component c is computed as a drop in the network upstream robustness of the network G (see EQ. 10): -
- The use of the robustness of the component c in both the numerator and denominator acts as a correction factor to ensure that the downstream criticality of a leaf node is 0. A leaf node is one with no children such that it has no effect on assets downstream of itself. Additional KPIs are also computed at
block 150. The disconnection impact index (DIIt) of an asset t quantifies the impact of its removal from the network from different perspectives. Consequences of the removal of an asset t can be measured based on different aspects (consequences of the removal) including, for example, the number of disconnected assets, the number of disconnected customers (from the network), the amount of lost demand, and the amount of lost revenue. Consequences represent the set of these and other consequences, and -
S t ={a 1 ,a 2 , . . . ,a l} [EQ. 16] - EQ. 16 indicates the set of assets that are disconnected upon removal of the asset t. Then DIIt is given by:
-
- With regard to the consequences, for example, quantifying DIIt of an asset t in terms of the number of disconnected customers requires evaluating the summation of the number of disconnected customers per disconnected asset in the set of assets shown in EQ. 16.
- Determining the upstream robustness and downstream criticality of the assets of the network, as well as the network as a whole facilitates managing the network at
block 160. The relative criticality of a given asset may suggest a more or less frequent inspection and maintenance period, for example. More critical assets may be inspected and maintained more often than less critical assets. As another example, the source of a less robust asset may be maintained more often than the source of a more robust asset. The information may be used to upgrade the system, as well. For example, a redundant source may be added for highly critical assets. -
FIG. 4 is aprocessing system 400 configured to implement embodiments described herein. The processes detailed herein may be implemented by one or more processors (processing circuits) 410 based on instructions stored in one ormore memory devices 420. Thememory devices 420 may additionally store data used in the processing. The instructions and one ormore memory devices 420 represent a computer program product to implement the detailed processes. Theprocessing system 400 may additionally include an input interface 430 (e.g., keyboard, wired or wireless communication link) to receive commands or data, as well as an output interface 440 (e.g., display device, communication link) to send output. The computer program product (420) andprocessor 410 may be stand-alone components or may be integrated with other components of the network. - The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises” and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one more other features, integers, steps, operations, element components, and/or groups thereof.
- The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of all means or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended to include any structure, material, or act for performing the function in combination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. The description of the present invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. The embodiment was chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and the practical application, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated
- The flow diagrams depicted herein are just one example. There may be many variations to this diagram or the steps (or operations) described therein without departing from the spirit of the invention. For instance, the steps may be performed in a differing order or steps may be added, deleted or modified. All of these variations are considered a part of the claimed invention.
- While the preferred embodiment to the invention had been described, it will be understood that those skilled in the art, both now and in the future, may make various improvements and enhancements which fall within the scope of the claims which follow. These claims should be construed to maintain the proper protection for the invention first described.
- The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present invention have been presented for purposes of illustration, but are not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the described embodiments. The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain the principles of the embodiments, the practical application or technical improvement over technologies found in the marketplace, or to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodiments disclosed herein.
Claims (1)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US18/152,443 US20230155896A1 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2023-01-10 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
Applications Claiming Priority (5)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US14/665,398 US9923778B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-03-23 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US14/745,775 US9992069B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-06-22 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US16/000,818 US10778529B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2018-06-05 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US17/020,794 US11552854B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2020-09-14 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US18/152,443 US20230155896A1 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2023-01-10 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US17/020,794 Continuation US11552854B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2020-09-14 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20230155896A1 true US20230155896A1 (en) | 2023-05-18 |
Family
ID=56974379
Family Applications (5)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US14/665,398 Active 2036-04-12 US9923778B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-03-23 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US14/745,775 Active 2035-09-09 US9992069B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-06-22 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US16/000,818 Active US10778529B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2018-06-05 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US17/020,794 Active US11552854B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2020-09-14 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US18/152,443 Pending US20230155896A1 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2023-01-10 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
Family Applications Before (4)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US14/665,398 Active 2036-04-12 US9923778B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-03-23 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US14/745,775 Active 2035-09-09 US9992069B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2015-06-22 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US16/000,818 Active US10778529B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2018-06-05 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US17/020,794 Active US11552854B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2020-09-14 | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (5) | US9923778B2 (en) |
Families Citing this family (6)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US10389600B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2019-08-20 | Utopus Insights, Inc. | Network management based on modeling of cascading effect of failure |
US9923778B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2018-03-20 | Utopus Insights, Inc. | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
CN112241820B (en) * | 2019-07-16 | 2023-11-14 | ***通信集团浙江有限公司 | Risk identification method and device for key nodes in fund flow and computing equipment |
US10887183B1 (en) * | 2019-09-18 | 2021-01-05 | Virtustream Ip Holding Company Llc | System and method for topological redundancy |
CN111131042B (en) * | 2019-12-19 | 2021-05-14 | 华南理工大学 | Multi-mode routing method for underwater communication |
US11855866B1 (en) * | 2022-09-29 | 2023-12-26 | The Mitre Corporation | Systems and methods for assessing a computing network's physical robustness |
Family Cites Families (40)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6163855A (en) * | 1998-04-17 | 2000-12-19 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and system for replicated and consistent modifications in a server cluster |
WO2003039070A2 (en) * | 2001-11-01 | 2003-05-08 | British Telecommunications Public Limited Company | Method and apparatus for analysing network robustness |
US7313087B2 (en) * | 2003-06-20 | 2007-12-25 | Ericsson Ab | Distributed protection switching |
US7394760B1 (en) * | 2003-07-09 | 2008-07-01 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Method and system for correlating practical constraints in a network |
US7453824B1 (en) * | 2003-07-10 | 2008-11-18 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Method and system for identifying optimal mapping in a network |
US7451210B2 (en) * | 2003-11-24 | 2008-11-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Hybrid method for event prediction and system control |
US7529195B2 (en) * | 2004-07-30 | 2009-05-05 | Fortiusone, Inc. | System and method of mapping and analyzing vulnerabilities in networks |
US7571028B2 (en) | 2005-04-19 | 2009-08-04 | Genscape Intangible Holding, Inc. | Method and system for AC power grid monitoring |
US7808921B2 (en) * | 2006-05-19 | 2010-10-05 | The Research Foundation Of State University Of New York | Bridging centrality: a concept and formula to identify bridging nodes in scale-free networks |
US7610429B2 (en) * | 2007-01-30 | 2009-10-27 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Method and system for determining device criticality in a computer configuration |
US7991512B2 (en) | 2007-08-28 | 2011-08-02 | General Electric Company | Hybrid robust predictive optimization method of power system dispatch |
US8463641B2 (en) * | 2007-10-05 | 2013-06-11 | The Boeing Company | Method and system using linear programming for estimating test costs for bayesian diagnostic models |
US8116229B2 (en) * | 2008-02-19 | 2012-02-14 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Reducing packet drops in networks guaranteeing in-order delivery |
US8040906B2 (en) * | 2009-06-23 | 2011-10-18 | Nortel Networks Limited | Utilizing betweenness to determine forwarding state in a routed network |
EP2599183B1 (en) | 2010-07-29 | 2016-11-30 | Spirae Inc. | Dynamic distributed power grid control system |
WO2012060883A2 (en) | 2010-11-03 | 2012-05-10 | Osisoft, Inc. | Power grid failure prediction and detection |
US8862743B1 (en) * | 2011-01-13 | 2014-10-14 | Google Inc. | Resource management |
US8588108B2 (en) * | 2011-02-21 | 2013-11-19 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus to trigger DAG reoptimization in a sensor network |
US9001669B2 (en) * | 2011-03-08 | 2015-04-07 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Remote stitched directed acyclic graphs |
US9099868B2 (en) | 2011-05-31 | 2015-08-04 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Control federation for utility grids |
US8619576B2 (en) * | 2011-07-12 | 2013-12-31 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Selective topology routing for distributed data collection |
US8948053B2 (en) * | 2011-09-12 | 2015-02-03 | Honeywell International Inc. | Apparatus and method for detecting critical nodes and critical links in a multi-hop network |
US8842520B2 (en) * | 2011-09-12 | 2014-09-23 | Honeywell International Inc. | Apparatus and method for identifying optimal node placement to form redundant paths around critical nodes and critical links in a multi-hop network |
US20130097125A1 (en) * | 2011-10-12 | 2013-04-18 | Vmware, Inc. | Automated analysis of unstructured data |
US8856936B2 (en) * | 2011-10-14 | 2014-10-07 | Albeado Inc. | Pervasive, domain and situational-aware, adaptive, automated, and coordinated analysis and control of enterprise-wide computers, networks, and applications for mitigation of business and operational risks and enhancement of cyber security |
US9277482B2 (en) * | 2011-11-10 | 2016-03-01 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Adaptive reoptimization rate for unstable network topologies |
US20130163407A1 (en) * | 2011-12-21 | 2013-06-27 | Honeywell International Inc. | System and method for determining network element criticality |
US8630177B2 (en) * | 2012-02-27 | 2014-01-14 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Dynamic directed acyclic graph (DAG) root bypass for computer networks |
US9379971B2 (en) * | 2012-05-11 | 2016-06-28 | Simula Inovation AS | Method and apparatus for determining paths between source/destination pairs |
WO2014067142A1 (en) | 2012-11-02 | 2014-05-08 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Real-time data management for a power grid |
US20140280921A1 (en) * | 2013-03-15 | 2014-09-18 | Trane International Inc. | Device and method for detecting and visualizing network health |
CA2912452A1 (en) | 2013-05-13 | 2014-11-20 | Fulcrum Collaborations, Llc | System and method for integrated mission critical ecosystem management |
US9258120B1 (en) * | 2013-12-18 | 2016-02-09 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Distributed public key revocation |
JP2017510871A (en) * | 2014-01-10 | 2017-04-13 | セブン ブリッジズ ジェノミクス インコーポレイテッド | System and method for use of known alleles in read mapping |
US9094856B1 (en) * | 2014-02-25 | 2015-07-28 | Intelligent Fusion Technology, Inc. | Routing method for satellite communication network |
US10110439B2 (en) * | 2014-03-17 | 2018-10-23 | Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba | Identifying critical nodes in a wireless network using network topology |
US20160283874A1 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2016-09-29 | International Business Machines Corporation | Failure modeling by incorporation of terrestrial conditions |
US10389600B2 (en) * | 2015-03-23 | 2019-08-20 | Utopus Insights, Inc. | Network management based on modeling of cascading effect of failure |
US9923778B2 (en) | 2015-03-23 | 2018-03-20 | Utopus Insights, Inc. | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets |
US10355478B2 (en) * | 2017-03-22 | 2019-07-16 | Eaton Intelligent Power Limited | System and method for asset health monitoring using multi-dimensional risk assessment |
-
2015
- 2015-03-23 US US14/665,398 patent/US9923778B2/en active Active
- 2015-06-22 US US14/745,775 patent/US9992069B2/en active Active
-
2018
- 2018-06-05 US US16/000,818 patent/US10778529B2/en active Active
-
2020
- 2020-09-14 US US17/020,794 patent/US11552854B2/en active Active
-
2023
- 2023-01-10 US US18/152,443 patent/US20230155896A1/en active Pending
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US20210006469A1 (en) | 2021-01-07 |
US20160285691A1 (en) | 2016-09-29 |
US9923778B2 (en) | 2018-03-20 |
US20180351814A1 (en) | 2018-12-06 |
US9992069B2 (en) | 2018-06-05 |
US20160285689A1 (en) | 2016-09-29 |
US11552854B2 (en) | 2023-01-10 |
US10778529B2 (en) | 2020-09-15 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US20230155896A1 (en) | Network management based on assessment of topological robustness and criticality of assets | |
US11683238B2 (en) | Network management based on modeling of cascading effect of failure | |
Wang et al. | On progressive network recovery after a major disruption | |
CN107750443B (en) | Parallelized network traffic flow availability simulation using stochastic processes and traffic engineering algorithms | |
Tong et al. | Algorithms for Bayesian network modeling, inference, and reliability assessment for multistate flow networks | |
EP3072200B1 (en) | Holistic optimization of distribution automation using survivability modeling to support storm hardening | |
CN104008455B (en) | Forward-back substitution method for reliability assessment of complex radial power distribution networks | |
US20180232807A1 (en) | Advanced decentralized financial decision platform | |
CN104615476A (en) | Selected virtual machine replication and virtual machine restart techniques | |
Rohrer et al. | Predicting topology survivability using path diversity | |
CN110108981A (en) | The method for diagnosing faults and system of route in a kind of active power distribution network | |
Li et al. | Interdependent effects of critical infrastructure systems under different types of disruptions | |
Hu et al. | Determination of optimal MR&R policies for retaining life-cycle connectivity of bridge networks | |
US20160117622A1 (en) | Shared risk group management system, shared risk group management method, and shared risk group management program | |
Castillo et al. | $ mk $ Robust Observability in State Estimation | |
US10680747B2 (en) | System and method to measure and score application health via correctable errors | |
Booker et al. | Efficient traffic loss evaluation for transport backbone networks | |
Singh et al. | Important factors for estimating reliability of SOA | |
El-Sherbeny | Stochastic Analysis of a Two Non‐Identical Unit Parallel System with Different Types of Failures Subject to Preventive Maintenance and Repairs | |
Zio et al. | Vulnerability analysis of a power transmission system | |
Xia | Rewiring Strategy Based on Directed Betweenness to Mitigate Disruptions of Large‐Scale Supply Chain Networks | |
Sharda et al. | Smart Grid Communication Network Reliability Assessment Using Graphical Computational Model | |
Piratla et al. | Assessment of metrics for resilient design of water distribution networks | |
Hayashi | Transformation from Availability Expression to Time-Specific Failure/Success Frequency Expressions | |
Grebenyuk et al. | Search and Selection of Blocking Cross-sections in the Analysis of Vulnerability and Efficiency of Engineering Networks |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: UTOPUS INSIGHTS, INC., NEW YORK Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:062633/0772 Effective date: 20170317 Owner name: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, NEW YORK Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:AGGARWAL, AANCHAL;CHAUDHARY, HARSH;KOG, YAKUP;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20150316 TO 20150319;REEL/FRAME:062633/0719 |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: DOCKETED NEW CASE - READY FOR EXAMINATION |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION ENTERED AND FORWARDED TO EXAMINER |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: FINAL REJECTION MAILED |